Invest in Athletic Diversification

January 7, 2013

By Scott Westfall
MSU Institute for the Study of Youth Sports
 

As part of my duties at Michigan State University, I have recently conducted extended research in the area of sport specialization. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, sport specialization is focusing on one sport year-round while eliminating all other sports or activities.

According to Dr. K. Anders Ericsson, in order for a person to achieve expertise in a sport or activity, he or she must invest approximately 10 years or 10,000 hours of practice. Thus, children, parents, and coaches might see specializing in one sport as a fast track to gaining the expertise needed to win starting positions, state championships, and even college scholarships.

However, these remarkable accomplishments (if they are actually reached) can come with some nasty baggage including social isolation, mental burnout, psychological stress, and overuse injuries such as stress fractures, Osgood-Schlatter & Sever’s Diseases. Often what remains is a kid with some very polished skills, but no love for the sport and a body that has had enough!

To combat these problems, young athletes should participate in numerous sports until at least the age of 14 or 15. When young athletes diversify their sports experiences, they reduce the physical impact by spreading it across different parts of the body, thereby allowing for a faster and more thorough recovery.

Furthermore, sport diversification allows kids to learn transferrable physical skills to other sports, not to mention introducing them to a larger group of active peers, along with more coaches and role models to assist with the tribulations of adolescence.

As a former coach, I can attest to the excitement I felt when I had a group of players that were gung-ho and fully committed to my sport. I would become outwardly excited when they would ask, “What can I do this offseason to get better?”

While I was tempted to respond selfishly with answers specific to my sport (which most likely would make our team better), I would try to think of the “whole child,” causing me to reply with the question, “What other sports are you going to try this year?

The cultures in high school athletic departments can be somewhat ambivalent. While coaches would like to believe that their colleagues always support them and their program, there is adequate reason for them to be skeptical. After all, with the trend of sport specialization, coaches at the same school can end up competing with each other for athletes – even when their seasons do not overlap.

Often I have heard coaches say, “I don’t discourage kids from going out for another sport.” Even if they do not outwardly deter athletes from joining other sports, a coach’s personal interests, reactions, and body language can be felt and heard sometimes even louder than his or her words.

Coaches need to begin supporting, collaborating with, and trusting the expertise of their colleagues – believing they will improve student-athletes on many levels (maybe even in ways that original coach cannot). Coaches must work together and encourage young athletes to diversify by participating in additional sports.

The culture of the athletic department starts with the athletic director. Athletic directors must build a department and coaching staff that is conceived in collaboration, trust, and support for the high school’s entire athletic program. True collaboration cannot exist among coaches if competition for athletes is ongoing – coaches must share the pool of athletes by supporting and even encouraging participation in other sports.

Athletic Directors may be thinking “easier said than done.” So here are a few tips:

  • Hold pre-season meetings with all head coaches at the beginnings of each of the three major sports seasons (fall, winter & spring).
  • At these meetings, create buy-in with open communication. With the help of your coaches, make a list of the ways sport diversification can help the overall athletic program. Record the many transferrable skills that are seen between two sports (cross country gets wrestlers in shape during the fall season; basketball produces more athleticism for volleyball; track creates faster football players, etc.)
  • List fears or myths that each other’s sports or training regimens might present (heavy lifting on game days slows players down; football players lose bulk during wrestling season, coaches not wanting their best player to get hurt playing “other” sports, etc.). Once these fears are brought into the open and effectively addressed, coaches will be much more open to supporting each other’s programs.
  • Make a policy for offseason training (weight room, speed training, fall baseball, etc.). Establish that these are supplemental and should be held at different times of the day than practices or games. Example: Mandatory weight training sessions should take place before or during school – not during another team’s practice. This will eliminate athletes from having to prioritize between participating in Sport A and training for Sport B.
  • Create a huge master schedule to map-out and plan all summer sports camps so they do not overlap. This will allow athletes to participate in multiple camps and reduce the competition coaches have for athletes’ time during the summer.
  • Encourage (politely demand) all coaches to work in the weight room during the offseason and summer. This will boost cooperation among coaching staffs. No longer will the weight room be seen as belonging only to the football team. Conversely, football coaches will not feel they are babysitting athletes from other sports when they come to train.
  • Encourage (politely demand) all head coaches keep the scorebook and/or run the clock at the home games for other sports events. When athletes and parents see head coaches supporting other programs, the tone will be set that the athletic department is diversified and supportive of all teams.

Athletic Directors: If you are met with some hesitation, know you are creating change. If you receive backlash or resentment from your coaches, sit down with them and hear them out. However, stay true to your vision that collaboration, trust, and support are the new culture you want for your athletic department. To paraphrase Jim Collins from his book Good to Great, “You are trying to get the right people on the bus, the wrong people off the bus, and the right people sitting in the right seats!”

Coaches: This change might take some getting used to, but in the end sport specialization will be better understood and allowed as the exception rather than the norm. Kids will participate in multiple sports and you will be a member of a high school coaching staff built on collaboration and trust. These will combine to create a richer athletic culture at your school.

However, the greatest improvement will be for your student-athletes’ individual experiences; they will be healthier physically, socially and psychologically.

Scott Westfall has spent the last 10 years as a teacher, coach, and athletic director in Fort Collins, Colo. He currently is working on his Doctorate at Michigan State University, with an emphasis in Sport Psychology and Athletic Administration, and assisting the MHSAA with its student leadership programs. Westfall is a former athlete who participated in football, wrestling, tennis and cross country at the high school level, and rugby at the collegiate level. He can be reached at [email protected].

Involvement vs. Meaningful Involvement

November 27, 2012

By Jed Blanton
MSU Institute for the Study of Youth Sports

As I've worked with the MHSAA in student leadership development and through my role in performance consulting and mental training, a number of coaches and athletes have asked me how to “get kids to buy in” or see the vision of their coach/captain, etc.

Particularly in high school sports, rosters consist of players with reasons for participating in their sport that range from pure enjoyment and social life, all the way to kids with aspirations and ability to play in the highest level of college athletics.

Having a range of talent, and then a range of desire and commitment can be a difficult load to balance as a coach.

Based on the questions I've been posed over the years, it seems that the magic answer lies somewhere in this notion of “buy-in” and if, just if, the coach could trigger that “buy-in” everything would work out. A winning season or at least a more successful season would be a certainty, and all the athletes would be emotionally involved, or more so, emotionally invested, as well as completely and fully physically and mentally committed to THE GAME.

This almost sounds like the ideal ending of a Disney sports movie … but that doesn't mean it isn't a possibility, and we can find some ways to make your reality closer to this vision.

The trick is … there is no trick; there is no magic formula. The ability to create “buy-in” means giving up something that might make a coach shudder and cringe just a bit. My challenge to coaches is this: Give up control. SHARE some of the duties and tasks you feel are your job, with … your players.

DON’T hit the back button or close your browser just yet. Let me explain.

The first thing to understand here is how people learn. If we want our athletes to “buy in,” we may have to teach “buy-in” first, which involves understanding how people learn behaviors and adopt a mentality, as the state of “buy-in” would be considered.

Psychologically, we know that people can learn merely from watching and modeling others. But in the short-term, this tends to include only behaviors, not the more abstract notions of passion or commitment which is seemingly what coaches desire more of in their players when we talk about “buy-in.”

However, it is important. So the first thing a coach needs to do is behave in such ways that indicate they are “bought in,” more so than just telling kids to be more committed. Have you ever stopped to think about what it looks like when someone has “bought in” to an athletic team’s vision? Do you have a team vision statement to guide behaviors and goals?

The next step in how people learn new behaviors upon watching others is having those behaviors they are attempting to mimic reinforced. Encouraging players and showing gratitude to those who demonstrate the desired mentality will help foster the expectations you have for your players. I must point out here that punishing or dismissing players and behaviors that stray from this desired state won’t help the learning process.

Next, and here is where the challenge lies, is sacrificing some control and sharing some responsibilities with your players. This entails involving them in the process of the sport. So often our high school athletes experience sport very passively. They are told what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. Then critiqued, sometimes put down and constantly judged on their abilities to do very little else than act in the ways they are told to act.

There is no option for personal investment here. Trust is the guiding factor. And while trust is extremely important, it’s not what may ultimately create “buy-in.”

Involvement fosters ownership. Meaningful involvement requires an emotional investment because the amount of responsibility increases. So what does being meaningfully involved look like? Being meaningfully involved in the sport as an athlete would mean being able to make decisions that are then actually carried out before they are critiqued. If you ask a player what they think about any given decision, then tell them what you think (which is also what they’ll do), you are merely seeking input rather than allowing them to be involved. What would it look like if the captain or senior players were able to set the starting line-up or batting order? Or what if the athletes were in charge of running a two-hour practice once a week? How about letting one or two of the athletes decide what play is going to be run in the final minutes of a close game? I mentioned the word “trust” earlier, and the key in these examples is coaches are showing athletes “trust.” This just might be what fosters the all important “buy-in.”

The hardest part on the coaches’ end is letting the decision play out, and then talking about why it may have failed. Discussing it rationally, debriefing the decision, and allowing them to process where the mistake was made without placing blame on them is where athletes can really learn about their sport, their role on the team, and how to make tough decisions while sharing in the full experience of the competition and preparation. 

There is always a chance they’ll make the same decision you would make as the coach. After all, they have been practicing in your system. This is a great way to assess if you are having an impact and if your athletes are learning rather than just passively participating. 

As a former athlete, I can honestly say I never truly understood my sport (distance running) until I was asked to serve as a race director or create training programs for younger athletes and people interested in taking their running to a more competitive level. I’m sure for most first-time coaches, the number of decisions you have to make humbles your former-athlete self rather quickly.

Watching the student leadership program participants I work with struggle with projects and presentations they are asked to design is tough, and I want nothing more than to help them and make sure that it’s “right.” But I can also say that in those times when I've been able to see the end result in those instances when they made the decisions, they created something on their own, they are happier, more knowledgeable, and certainly “bought in,” as they have control for the first time. 

Blanton is a doctoral candidate at Michigan State University in the department of Kinesiology, specializing in the PsychoSocial Aspects of Sport and Physical Activity, and a research assistant for MSU's Institute for the Study of Youth Sports. He has served as a facilitator at MHSAA Captains Clinics the last three years and currently is assisting the association with its student leadership programs.